Clone an agent to disk

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the creation of a subfolder and the sync stamp side effect, which is valuable. But it does not mention overwrite behavior, required permissions beyond auth, or failure modes if the workspace is not sync-connected. It adds some transparency but leaves gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and then key details. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a clone tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, prerequisite (auth), and a critical side effect (sync stamp). It lacks return format and error conditions, but for an agent to call it correctly, the essential information is present. The only notable omission is the componentCollections parameter, which is a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description clarifies outputDir by noting it is the parent for the agent-named subfolder, adding meaning beyond the schema. It does not address componentCollections, and with 60% schema coverage, it partially compensates but not fully. The other parameters already have schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (download/clone), the resource (existing agent), and the destination (subfolder under outputDir in a sync-connected workspace). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cs_create_agent or cs_pull by emphasizing the sync stamp and sync-connected workspace, which is unique to this clone operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly mentions the prerequisite of a pac auth profile and the side effect of recording a sync stamp used by cs_check_drift and cs_push, providing context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternative tools, leaving some inference to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.